Alexander's emulation of Achilles

[Taphoi]

Curiously, Heckel has recently urged that credence be given to the 19th century opinion of
Perrin that Alexander and Hephaistion first compared themselves to Achilles and Patroclus
after the battle of Gaugamela. He suggests that the story of the Trojan sacrifices was
invented by later writers to fit the comparison between the two couples and that Alexander
merely showed respect for Achilles as his putative maternal ancestor. However, Aeschines
gave the following information in a speech in 330BC:-Aeschines, Against Ctesiphon 160
But when Philip was dead and Alexander had come to the throne, Demosthenes again put on
prodigious airs and caused a shrine to be dedicated to Pausanius and involved the senate
in the charge of having offered sacrifice of thanksgiving as for good news. And he
nicknamed Alexander "Margites"; and he had the effrontery to say that Alexander would never
stir out of Macedonia, for he was content, he said, to saunter around in Pella...Demosthenes' use of the nickname "Margites" for Alexander was stated by Harpocration to
have been corroborated by Alexander's contemporary, Marsyas of Pella. Margites was the
name of a caricature of Achilles in a poem that passed under the name of Homer, but in fact
parodied his Iliad. Richardson has explained, "Demosthenes asserted, then, that Alexander,
in his aspiration to be the second Achilles, would never get farther than to become a
caricature of him". We therefore have it on the authority of Demosthenes that it was widely
known in Greece that Alexander sought to emulate Achilles as early as 336BC, before he had
even stirred out of Macedonia. We also have Arrian's incidental comment that Alexander had
a rivalry with Achilles from boyhood. We know from Plutarch (Life 8, 26 & Moralia 327F) and Pliny (NH 7.29.108) that Aristotle
had edited a recension of the Iliad for Alexander, which he eventually kept by his bed
(or beneath his pillow?) in a fabulously beautiful casket captured from Darius. Also from
Plutarch we have the story that Alexander's tutor, Lysimachos, ingratiated himself with the
prince by calling Alexander, Achilles; Philip, Peleus and himself, Phoinix, the instructor
of Achilles. It is therefore verging on the incredible that the comparison of Hephaistion
with Patroclus had not occurred to Alexander by the time he became king.

[jona]

Thanks.The identification of Margites with Achilles, however, is not without criticism. As far as I know, Lane Fox was the first to do this proposal, but other possibilities are more likely. The Margites of fragment 6 is a clumsy man without any practical knowledge, the exact opposite of Odysseus, not Achilleus - for whose straightforward heroism "practical knowledge" is simply irrelevant.The story of the casket, quoted several times by Plutarch, is from Onesicritus. It may be true, but in my view: what else could Alexander mention? If you ask the president of the USA what's the most precious object in the world, he will say that it is the Bible, but this does not mean that he tries to emulate one of the Biblical heroes (although I admit that the current president sometimes gives the impression).The story of Hephaestion/Alexander at Troy is rejected by Bosworth too (HCA).Perhaps, it is interesting to look at another so-called Achilles emulation: Alexander cuts down his hair after the death of Hephaestion. Indeed, this is a homeric parallel... but: this was a very common practice.Jona

[Taphoi]

There is no real doubt that Margites was the anti-hero of a parody of the Iliad, so he will have been identifiable as an anti-hero equivalent of Achilles by Demoshenes' audience.There is other evidence from Alexander's lifetime too. Choirilos is said to have sought to flatter Alexander by comparing him with Achilles (unsuccessfully, because Alexander had a poor opinion of his poetical skills). This also shows that contemporaries of Alexander believed the King liked to be compared to Achilles.It is therefore untrue that there is no contemporary evidence (I have given you two pieces). You have presented no positive evidence that the numerous ancient sources that assert or imply that such a comparison was made are wrong. One ancient source might be wrong, but many clearly independent ones cannot be. Your position is unsustainable on the evidence. I would suggest you would be better off dropping this, but that's your prerogative, of course.Why is it so important to you to fly in the face of so much ancient evidence? Is this in support of some modern theory?There is no good reason to disbelieve the story about the sacrifices at Troy either, despite the fact that Arrian didn't get it from his main sources. Indeed, the Last Plan of Alexander to build the biggest temple in the world at Troy tends to support the story in my view. It is also perfectly consistent with everything else we know.Best wishes,Andrew

[smittysmitty]

ancient evidence! hmmm!you can't see what you're presenting as having many interpretative aspects? Richardson? Demosthenes?It passes as historical evidence?
Oh well, I'm at least happy for people to believe whatever they like on this matter these days, and I guess the operative word here being believe!
cheers!

[jona]

"Why is it so important to you to fly in the face of so much ancient evidence?"Actually, it's not important at all to me. It's just that someone posted the Achilles emulation as a self-evident psychological explanation; to which I replied that the comparison may have originated in flattery and does not say anything about Alexander's psyche, after which the discussion started.My thesis was (a) that there is no evidence for Achilles emulation during his life time - which I should perhaps refine to "the evidence for Heracles, Dionysus and Ammon is stronger"; and (b) (the real issue) even if we knew that Alexander consciously imitated Achilles, we can not look into Alexander's mind and don't know what he thought. Lane Fox's idea that it is through Homer that Alexander comes to live, is simply nonsense, and we can not use the Achilles as a summary of Alexander's psyche, which is where the discussion started."Is this in support of some modern theory?"Actually, the idea we could understand Alexander through Homer is the modern theory, proposed especially by Lane Fox, and taken for granted by Wood. In the nineteenth century, few scholars would have appreciated this idea."There is no real doubt that Margites was the anti-hero of a parody of the Iliad"Well, I'm not convinced; we have only a couple of fragments and personally, I think it's rather bold to state there's no real doubt.Choirilos: possibly, I am missing something, but QCR 8.5.8 / Clitarchus only mentions that he was the worst poet at Alexander's court. All other sources (Hesychius, Suda, Stephanus of Byzantium, Poprhyry) are really late. I can not check Chrysippus' remarks at home."You have presented no positive evidence that the
numerous ancient sources that assert or imply that
such a comparison was made are wrong."But this is not my point. I am not argueing that the comparision was never made - because every flatterer of every Greek or Macedonian politician made Homeric parallels; what I am arguing is that one can not say that Homer is a shortcut to Alexander's mind.Jona

[jona]

BTW, I almost forget to tell you how much I liked your article on "The Tomb of Alexander the Great in Alexandria" in AJAH. I quote it in my book. We had a brief discussion about your Alexander / Mark / Venice theory at this forum about two months ago.Jona

[Taphoi]

I appreciate the refinement of your position.I am quoting the Choirilos via Porphyry. The authenticity of this is supported by older refs to Choirilos as a flatterer of Alexander.I am personally aware, having made a study of the matter, that the links between Alexander and Achilles are stronger than has generally been recognised (and I think they are already strong). My first post was actually a quote from part of my manuscript on this and related matters. I would hope to publish it eventually. There is a lot more evidence in it to support the idea that Alexander deliberately emulated Achilles.Best wishes,Andrew

[Taphoi]

Thanks for the kind words. I saw the previous thread on my History Today article and thought it sensible.My book on The Lost Tomb of Alexander the Great will have lots more evidence on the St Mark connection and other tomb theories. It will be published by Periplus of London at about the beginning of October. I am working on final proofs. Amazon UK is doing a good pre-ordering deal on it at the moment if anyone is interested:http://www.amazon.co.uk/and search on "tomb alexander".Best wishes,Andrew

[jan]

I looked to see if there are links to Heckel on this website but could not find any. The paragraph on Heckel causes me to tell you that at yahoogroups Alexander-Macedon website is a great link to Heckel. I browsed through it just this past week, and want to call your attention to it. Jan

[jona]

As we are courteously but seriously in disagreement, I courteously offer my serious criticism of any manuscript you would like to be checked. That is, perhaps I can find too easy statements; and perhaps, you can convince me. So, if I can be of any assistance, just let me know - nothing is better for a manuscript than having it read by a sceptical friend.Jona

[jona]

"I am working on final proofs."That makes two of us - good luck.Jona

[xxx]

I would agree with you Andrew.To assume all later source evidence is incorrect is a dangerous position to hold. One should not study the bark of trees so carefully that you can't see the forest There is certainly enough evidence to support your hypothesis.

[Taphoi]

Thanks for your generous offer. The manuscript is not yet finished and there may be other practical difficulties, but I will bear your offer in mind.Good luck with your book.I should perhaps also have mentioned that I should have two articles in Minerva shortly, probably in the September-October 2004 edition. One will give some further information on the St Mark connection, including a new latest reference to Alexander's body in Alexandria. The other is an analysis of Alexander's death.Best wishes,Andrew